Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Reports of 50" Apple Television in Jonathan Ive's Lab as Talk Heightens Ahead of CES
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There's absolutely no reason for the TV to have that high of a resolution. 1920x1080 is all it needs, since all movies and shows will be broadcast at either that or 1280x720 for the foreseeable future.
Personally, I'm glad to hear that there is a larger TV in the works. The previous rumors concerned me that there would not be enough choice. Apple has a pretty bad track record of giving us choices in display size (and quality for that matter). If the TV were 32-37", I would be tempted instead to just by a base model 27" iMac and vesa mount it. Don't they sell adapters to go HDMI in to an iMac now and use it as an external display if you wanted to use a BD player, PS3, etc? The larger size would seal the deal for me. Right now I have a TV that is about 32" and it is much much too small, I would want at least 42".
If the device can adapt it's Resolution for the content you won't notice when it kicks down to Full HD 1920 x 1080 seeing that WQHD is a 16:9 aspect ratio being that it is Wide-Quad HD.
FYI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WQHD#WQHD_.282560.C3.971440.29
I never said that since I don't use then it should not be used like that. That's only for people that never seen the death grip around these parts...
My point is that it is still a gaming machine FIRST. I doubt there are many people who by an XBOX as a Media player FIRST, but I could be wrong
What I really need is an Apple TV that is also an HDMI switcher and has an OTA tuner. Let it have 1 HDMI output, 4 HDMI inputs, and an OTA antenna input. Then I can hook other devices to the back of the Apple TV as well as local digital stations, but keep the TV on the Apple TV input at all times.
If this were the case I could AirPlay no matter what else I was watching. I could also tell Siri to "Show me what's on Dish Network" to have it switch inputs to Dish Network or "Switch to my DVD Changer" to have it switch inputs to my DVD changer or I could say "Show me what's on ABC". Give that same Apple TV enough flash storage or a hard drive to DVR the OTA stuff and it would be really awesome (don't see that happening though).
Unfortunately IR Blasters are far too complex for setup than Apple is willing to do, or else then Siri could be made to control anything while allowing AirPlay without switching inputs on the TV and instant-access to my iTunes collection of music and video.
If this were the case I could AirPlay no matter what else I was watching. I could also tell Siri to "Show me what's on Dish Network" to have it switch inputs to Dish Network or "Switch to my DVD Changer" to have it switch inputs to my DVD changer or I could say "Show me what's on ABC". Give that same Apple TV enough flash storage or a hard drive to DVR the OTA stuff and it would be really awesome (don't see that happening though).
Unfortunately IR Blasters are far too complex for setup than Apple is willing to do, or else then Siri could be made to control anything while allowing AirPlay without switching inputs on the TV and instant-access to my iTunes collection of music and video.
For what it's worth - I own a PS3 and bought it exclusively to play blu-rays. At the time and really, still today, it's probably the best blu-ray player on the market and has excellent support/updates and compatibility.
It's still useless, and won't be good for anything other than a sticker attraction. Assuming that 1920x downscaled will look as good on 2560x as it does native, it's still doesn't change the fact that there aren't any shows out there to take advantage of it. So you'll have this nice TV that will never display any content at it's native resolution, and is more expensive because it's...ooh...higher res than the competition.
The only thing it'd be good for is the UI. But considering you'll be sitting at least 10 feet away from a 50" TV, you won't ever notice the difference.
You mean like the Pippin, the Cube, and that round mouse everyone hated?
Nothing leads to failure quicker than the belief everything you do is awesome, I just hope Apple has more sense than their fanboys.
On the basis that they own the rights to "iTV" which everyone keeps dubbing this thing. I believe ITV have already won the whole ITV thing anyway against Apple with the Apple TV which was going to be called iTV.
I was thinking that this idea is more of an Apple idea:
The complete package - TV, streaming device (Apple TV) built-in, gaming (iOS) built-in, wireless surround-sound speakers, maybe glasses-less 3D, all with one remote-control device (iPad? iPod Touch?), and one plug.
No messy wires, a completely integrated approach. And I would expect that Apple would install these in your house as well. This would be a definite value-add, which many businesses (Stereo Advantage for one) are built around right now.
$3,000-$4,000 for the complete home theatre system would not be unreasonable. This is a high-end system, not something that college-age kids would buy. And this would not cheapen the Apple name.
The complete package - TV, streaming device (Apple TV) built-in, gaming (iOS) built-in, wireless surround-sound speakers, maybe glasses-less 3D, all with one remote-control device (iPad? iPod Touch?), and one plug.
No messy wires, a completely integrated approach. And I would expect that Apple would install these in your house as well. This would be a definite value-add, which many businesses (Stereo Advantage for one) are built around right now.
$3,000-$4,000 for the complete home theatre system would not be unreasonable. This is a high-end system, not something that college-age kids would buy. And this would not cheapen the Apple name.
but with those specs they can charge a fortune!
Yeah, that's about true. I can see the advertisements now...
"You haven't experienced television until you've seen it in...retina WOOOSSSHHHH."
"Dude! Have you seen the new Apple Retina TV? It's got tons more pixel-dots than those other TVs, and changed everything! AGAIN! And because Apple thinks of everything, I don't need disc based media! I can get movies through iTunes at 1280x720 with just two clicks of a button!"
Hell. I'd buy one.
If you buy and apple TV, its just another reason for u to buy an ipad, then an iphone, then a mac, so on and so on.
Smart consumers dont buy devices these days. We buy ecosystems. Microsoft understands that once us Apple fanboys start buying all these apps, movies, tv shows, music, and books on these devices, we are never going to want to switch to different platforms. At the endo fo the day, microsoft and others get burned.
Plus as others have stated, the XBOX is there Apple Tv right now. What do you think happens when the world starts buying these beautifully crafted Apple televisions?
Do bear in mind though that a large segment of Apple's target market do not live in Texas-sized houses
I live in the UK in a decent sized house and believe me a 52" screen is really far too big. Not even talking about your lottery-winner style theatre room with 120" projection.
There is plenty of market for smaller sizes outside the US.
Some people also just like the screen to be larger. I watch my 47" screen from 5-10'. I plan to replace it with a 70" or larger model in the next couple of years. My customers & me will remain in the same position as this is my fixed office space. 35 years ago it was a 12' X 17' living room, but office now. But then we are looking at text & numbers most of the time.
Bass ackwards
Remember how "the industry" worked hard to avoid being caught flat-footed by the iPad? Where are their iPad wannabes now?
The Dell Streak. The Dell Windows Slate. The Fusion Garage JooJoo. The Lenovo LePad.
The Notion Ink Adam. The Hearst Corp. Skiff Reader. The Lenovo U1 netbook/tablet.
The problem with all of those wannabes is that they tackled the pad computing problem the wrong way. By building the hardware first, then slapping an OS onto it, then realizing that they had little or no infrastructure to support it. But what else could they do? Most of those companies are PC makers. That's how they think.
Two years later, we can look back and see that the steps to building and selling a successful pad computer are:
1. Build a deep, robust, profitable media and services infrastructure.
2. Develop a simple easy-to-use mobile OS that can leverage that infrastructure.
3. Design a pad computer that uses your mobile OS to access your infrastructure.
Apple did it this way. Everyone else (except Amazon) is doing it backwards. Your pad computer, no matter how slick it is, is only a window into your infrastructure. It's just an empty frame. The box that the software and services come in.
I'd expect Apple to do the same thing with their television offering, if and when they release it.
Remember how "the industry" worked hard to avoid being caught flat-footed by the iPad? Where are their iPad wannabes now?
The Dell Streak. The Dell Windows Slate. The Fusion Garage JooJoo. The Lenovo LePad.
The Notion Ink Adam. The Hearst Corp. Skiff Reader. The Lenovo U1 netbook/tablet.
The problem with all of those wannabes is that they tackled the pad computing problem the wrong way. By building the hardware first, then slapping an OS onto it, then realizing that they had little or no infrastructure to support it. But what else could they do? Most of those companies are PC makers. That's how they think.
Two years later, we can look back and see that the steps to building and selling a successful pad computer are:
1. Build a deep, robust, profitable media and services infrastructure.
2. Develop a simple easy-to-use mobile OS that can leverage that infrastructure.
3. Design a pad computer that uses your mobile OS to access your infrastructure.
Apple did it this way. Everyone else (except Amazon) is doing it backwards. Your pad computer, no matter how slick it is, is only a window into your infrastructure. It's just an empty frame. The box that the software and services come in.
I'd expect Apple to do the same thing with their television offering, if and when they release it.
Last edited:
Hahahaha.. awesome.
If Apple wants to use iTV, they probably can. Money talks in negotiations. The iPhone name was still taken even when Apple made their iPhone 1 announcement. Apple really wanted the name badly, and was willing to pay for the name. They can do the same for the TV, but I think 'Apple TV' sounds better than 'iTV'.
And 'iveTV' sounds the best.
Last edited:
You mean like the ipod, ipad and iphone?
You mean like the itunes store?
You mean like the app store?
You mean like the MacBookAir, you mean like MacBooks and Pros , iMacs all of which can run PC OS as well as OSX?
You mean like we must look at stuff from umpteen years ago to gauge what they will do next?
You mean Apple cares about fanboys?
5-10' away from a 70" TV? For some reason, I got this picture in my head of all your office buddies watching a tennis match, and you're all jerking your heads to the left...right...left...right.
That'd be almost as bad as sitting in the front row of a movie theatre.
Whether Apple's TV is a nice product or not I'm really reluctant about turning more of my media content over to them. iPhone with its apps, both Lion and W7 for computing, Blu Ray discs for movies and cable for TV seems to be a nice balance with a lot of flexibility and freedom.
None of this seems very compelling so far. Hope there is a whole lot more than apps and downloads. Like scottsjack above notes, there is a lot of choice now and damn good ways to view it.
Better integration and a less nerdy way for average people to access what is available now would seem to be more important than really a very cloistered viewing world.
Better integration and a less nerdy way for average people to access what is available now would seem to be more important than really a very cloistered viewing world.
You're assuming nobody will go beyond with it.
- Being able to view HD content at 1:1 and surround it with other useful info - no picture degradation, yet more useful.
- Multiple channels at source resolution...or reduced resolution and still look great.
- Upscale HD source by 1.5 and still have room for high-resolution guide info.
- Step out of the HDTV realm, past 1920x1080 constraints to higher resolutions of varying dimensions.
- RED cameras are of relatively moderate cost (considering their applications) yet go well beyond HD resolutions. Given the option of even better resolution content production with existing affordable equipment, producing shows at such resolution becomes viable, nigh unto unavoidable - esp. if Apple encourages/subsidizes it.
- Bring the 4K digital theater experience home.
It's not just about now, it's about making the path to the future. Nobody did "retina displays" ... until Apple did, and suddenly everyone is. 1080p HDTV is nearly 20 years old now; small wonder Apple might be the one to push WQHD.
http://xkcd.com/732/